(a) Business approval and public notice - Business name: Public housing project (B; hereinafter referred to as “instant project”): Defendant - Public notice: The Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs public notice on December 30, 2010;

B. The adjudication of expropriation made by the Central Land Tribunal on August 25, 2016 - The date of expropriation: 1,091 square meters of D forest land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”): 69,273,950 square meters - Compensation: 669,273,950 won - An appraisal corporation: a new appraisal corporation in the future, a stock company, a joint appraisal appraisal corporation, a joint stock company (hereinafter “appraisals of expropriation”) (hereinafter “adjudication of expropriation”), and the result of the appraisal conducted by the said appraiser [based on recognition]] without dispute, the fact that there is no dispute over the appraisal conducted by the said appraiser, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence, and evidence 1, 2 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was awarded a successful bid of KRW 835,00,000 in the Seoul Northern District Court E real estate auction procedure around 201.

The appraiser of the auction procedure for the above real estate is located near the instant land, and the land and land category of the instant case are 12,595 square meters of F forest land in Jung-gu, Seoul, the same as the instant land were selected as a comparative standard land, and the appraised value of the instant land as of October 25, 2010 was calculated as KRW 1,025,540,000.

Although the Korea Certified Appraisers G (hereinafter “instant court appraiser”) affiliated with the Central Certified Appraisers, Inc., the instant court appraiser, should have been selected as a comparative standard for the above land, the above land was selected as a comparative standard for the benefit of the Defendant or for the convenience of appraisal. However, for the benefit of the Defendant, the above land was selected as a comparative standard for H 1,650 square meters, which is not the above land.

Therefore, since both the result of the appraisal by acceptance and the result of the appraisal by the court of this case cannot be trusted, the defendant can be calculated when he selects the plaintiff as a comparative standard land of 12,595 square meters of Franchi-gu Seoul.